Microwaves emit as much carbon dioxide as nearly 7 million cars: Study

Agencies
January 18, 2018

New Delhi, Jan 18: Many studies have shown how microwave radiation can be harmful while heating food as the appliance can significantly zap the nutritional value of your food and your health, leaving you susceptible to developing health complications due to continuous microwave use.

Now, another study has found that the radiations from microwaves can have serious environmental implications as well.

As per the findings of the study, microwave ovens across Europe alone emit as much carbon dioxide as nearly 7 million cars.

The first-ever comprehensive study of the environmental impacts of microwaves, considering their whole life cycle – from 'cradle to grave' – has been carried out by researchers from the University of Manchester in the UK.

The study further found that microwaves emit 7.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year in the European Union (EU). This is equivalent to the annual emissions of 6.8 million cars.

Microwaves across the EU consume an estimated 9.4 terawatts per hour (TWh) of electricity every year. This is equivalent to the annual electricity generated by three large gas power plants.

Microwaves account for the largest percentage of sales of all type of ovens in the European Union (EU), with numbers set to reach nearly 135 million by 2020. Despite this, the scale of their impacts on the environment was not known until now.

The study used life cycle assessment (LCA) to estimate the impacts of microwaves, taking into account their manufacture, use and end-of-life waste management.

Altogether, the research team investigated 12 different environmental factors, including climate change, depletion of natural resources and ecological toxicity.

They found, for example, that the microwaves used across the EU emit 7.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year. This is equivalent to the annual emission of 6.8 million cars.

The research shows that the main environmental 'hotspots' are materials used to manufacture the microwaves, the manufacturing process and end-of-life waste management.

For example, the manufacturing process alone contributes more than 20 percent to depletion of natural resources and to climate change.

However, it is electricity consumption by microwaves that have the biggest impact on the environment, taking into account its whole life cycle, from the production of fuels to generation of electricity.

In total, microwaves across the EU consume an estimated 9.4 terawatts per hour of electricity every year. This is equivalent to the annual electricity generation by three large gas power plants.

The study found that, on average, an individual microwave uses 573 kilowatt-hours of electricity over its lifetime of eight years.

That is equivalent to the electricity consumed by a seven watt LED light bulb, left on continuously for almost nine years.

Due to their relatively low cost and ease of manufacture, consumers are throwing more electrical and electronic (EE) equipment away than ever before, including microwaves.

"Rapid technological developments and falling prices are driving the purchase of electrical and electronic appliances in Europe," said Alejandro Gallego-Schmid, from the University of Manchester.

"Consumers now tend to buy new appliances before the existing ones reach the end of their useful life as electronic goods have become fashionable and 'status' items," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 4,2020

The World Health Organisation on Wednesday said that anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) will return to the solidarity trial for the potential treatment of coronavirus disease.

At a press conference in the WHO headquarters in Geneva, Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said: "On the basis of the available mortality data, the members of the committee recommended that there are no reasons to modify the trial protocol. The Executive Group received this recommendation and endorsed continuation of all arms of the solidarity trial, including hydroxychloroquine."

The world health body had temporarily suspended the usage of HCQ from the solidarity trial for coronavirus treatment on May 25 soon after a study published in one of the most reliable medical journals, which had suggested that the drug could cause more fatalities among COVID-19 patients.

However, the WHO chief said that the decision was taken as a precaution while the safety data was reviewed.

Ghebreyesus also said that the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee will continue to closely monitor the safety of all therapeutics being tested in the solidarity trial.

"So far, more than 3,500 patients have been recruited in 35 countries. WHO is committed to accelerating the development of effective therapeutics, vaccines and diagnostics as part of our commitment to serving the world with science, solutions and solidarity," he said.

Soon after HCQ was suspended from the trial, the Indian government had said that the antimalarial drug has been known for its benefits for a long time and its usage will be continued on the frontline workers, including police and healthcare professionals, as prophylaxis. The government had also said that studies were being conducted and the drug would be included in the clinical trial also for the treatment of coronavirus disease.

US President Donald Trump also had strongly advocated the use of HCQ and called it a "game-changer". He went to the extent of saying that he had taken the medicine.

Launched by WHO and partners, solidarity trial is an international clinical trial to find an effective treatment for COVID-19, including drugs to slow the progression of the disease or improve survival. The trial, which enrols patients from different countries, "will compare four treatment options against standard of care to assess their relative effectiveness against COVID-19", said WHO. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 10,2020

Washington D.C., May 9: Do the middle age feel much stressful now, and seems to have changed over time, if compared to the life in the 90s? Well, this recent study indicates that it might be true.

The study has signalled to the fact that life may become more stressful majorly for middle-aged people than it was in the 1990s. The researchers reached this analysis even before the novel coronavirus started sweeping the globe.

A team of researchers led by Penn State found that across all ages, there was a slight increase in daily stress in the 2010s compared to the 1990s. But when researchers restricted the sample to people between the ages of 45 and 64, there was a sharp increase in daily stress.

"On average, people reported about 2 percent more stressors in the 2010s compared to people in the past," said David M. Almeida, professor of human development and family studies at Penn State.

"That's around an additional week of stress a year. But what really surprised us is that people at mid-life reported a lot more stressors, about 19 percent more stress in 2010 than in 1990. And that translates to 64 more days of stress a year."

Almeida said the findings were part of a larger project aiming to discover whether health during the middle of Americans' lives has been changing over time.

"Certainly, when you talk to people, they seem to think that daily life is more hectic and less certain these days," Almeida said.

For the study, the researchers collected data from 1,499 adults in 1995 and 782 different adults in 2012.

Almeida said the goal was to study two cohorts of people who were the same age at the time the data was collected but born in different decades. All study participants were interviewed daily for eight consecutive days.

During each daily interview, the researchers asked the participants about their stressful experiences throughout the previous 24 hours.

They asked questions related to arguments with family or friends or feeling overwhelmed at home or work, so and so. The participants were also asked how severe their stress was and whether those stressors were likely to impact other areas of their lives.

"We were able to estimate not only how frequently people experienced stress, but also what those stressors mean to them," Almeida said.

"For example, did this stress affect their finances or their plans for the future. And by having these two cohorts of people, we were able to compare daily stress processes in 1990 with daily stress processes in 2010," Almeida added.

After analyzing the data, the researchers found that participants reported significantly more daily stress and lower well-being in the 2010s compared to the 1990s.

Additionally, participants reported a 27 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their finances and a 17 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their future plans.

Almeida said he was surprised not that people were more stressed now than in the 90s, but at the age group that was mainly affected.

"We thought that with economic uncertainty, life might be more stressful for younger adults. But we didn't see that. We saw more stress for people at mid-life," Almeida said.

"And maybe that's because they have children who are facing an uncertain job market while also responsible for their own parents. So it's this generational squeeze that's making stress more prevalent for people at mid-life," he concluded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 14,2020

COVID-19 mostly kills through an overreaction of the immune system, whose function is precisely to fight infections, say scientists who have decoded the mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnosis of the disease caused by the SARS-Cov-2 coronavirus.

In a study published in the journal Frontiers in Public Health, the researchers explained step-by-step how the virus infects the airways, multiplies inside cells, and in severe cases causes the immune defences to overshoot with a "cytokine storm".

This storm is an over-activation of white blood cells, which release too-great amounts of cytokines -- inflammation-stimulating molecules --into the blood, they said.

"Similar to what happens after infection with SARS and MERS, data show that patients with severe COVID-19 may have a cytokine storm syndrome," said study author Daishun Liu, Professor at Zunyi Medical University in China.

"The rapidly increased cytokines attract an excess of immune cells such as lymphocytes and neutrophils, resulting in an infiltration of these cells into lung tissue and thus cause lung injury," Liu said.

The researchers explained that the cytokine storm ultimately causes high fever, excessive leakiness of blood vessels, and blood clotting inside the body.

It also causes extremely low blood pressure, lack of oxygen and excess acidity of the blood, and build-up of fluids in the lungs, they said.

The researchers noted that white blood cells are misdirected to attack and inflame even healthy tissue, leading to failure of the lungs, heart, liver, intestines, kidneys, and genitals.

This multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) may worsen and shutdown the lungs, a condition called acute respiratory distress syndrome, (ARDS), they said.

This, the researchers explained, happens due to the formation of a so-called hyaline membrane -- composed of debris of proteins and dead cells -- lining the lungs, which makes absorption of oxygen difficult.

Most deaths due to COVID-19 are therefore due to respiratory failure, they said.

The researchers explained that in the absence of a specific antiviral cure for COVID-19, the goal of treatment must be to the fight the symptoms, and lowering the mortality rate through intensive maintenance of organ function.

For example, an artificial liver blood purification system or renal replacement therapy can be used to filter the blood through mechanical means, they said.

The team noted that especially important are methods to supplement or replace lung function, for example with non-invasive mechanical ventilation through a mask, ventilation through a tube into the windpipe, the administration of heated and humidified oxygen via a tube in the nose, or a heart-lung bypass.

The researchers stressed the importance of preventing secondary infections.

They noted that SARS-Cov-2 also invades the intestines, where it causes inflammation and leakiness of the gut lining, allowing the opportunistic entry of other disease-causing microorganisms.

The researchers advocate that this should be prevented with nutritional support, for example with probiotics -- beneficial bacteria that protect against the establishment of harmful ones -- and nutrients and amino acids to improve the immune defences and function of the intestine.

"Because treatment for now relies on aggressive treatment of symptoms, preventative protection against secondary infections, such as bacteria and fungi, is particularly important to support organ function, especially in the heart, kidneys, and liver, to try and avoid further deterioration of their condition," Liu added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.